Chapter 7 - Energy
Introduction
1.
Chapter 7 – Energy in the PDP contains two objectives and nine policies relating to energy, as
well as setting out an explanation of the topic in the form of a comprehensive introduction and
five identified issues. In short, it identifies the importance of energy, particularly renewable
energy, and the potential for electricity generation within the Hurunui district, while
acknowledging that energy generation activities can have adverse effects on the environment.
2.
The rules relating to energy activities are not contained within Chapter 7; rather they are
contained within the zone rules set out in the Settlements and Rural chapters. Energy activities
are therefore managed according to the zone within which they are proposed to be located. In
addition, there are rules pertaining to energy activities within areas identified as ONLs/ONFs
and the Coastal Environment, contained within Chapters 11 and 12 respectively. Energy
activities are also subject to a range of district-wide rules contained in other chapters (for
example, indigenous vegetation clearance, activities within identified natural hazard areas),
albeit that these are not specific to energy activities.
3.
In recognition that the effects of energy activities are relative to their scale, energy activities are
separated into three categories in the PDP - small scale, community scale and commercial scale
- and managed according to the category they fall into.
Key Issues for Resolution
4.
The key issues in relation to this Chapter of the PDP are:
-
Whether the rules pertaining to energy activities should be located in Chapter 7 or remain
within the zone rules
What the appropriate activity status is for energy activities within ‘sensitive’ environments
– namely urban areas, ONL/ONFs and the Coastal Environment
Whether a broader range of energy activities should be permitted
Statutory Context
5.
There are several statutory documents that are relevant to the consideration of energy
activities and how these are managed in the Hurunui District. These are set out in more detail in
the s32 report and, at a broad level, include a range of matters set out in section 7 of the RMA
that the Council must have particular regard to, various provisions in the CRPS, and in relation
to energy activities in the coastal environment, include the NZCPS.
6.
Of particular relevance to Chapter 7 is the NPSREG which requires the Council to recognise the
national significance of renewable electricity generation (REG1) activities by providing for the
development, operation and maintenance and upgrading of new and existing REG activities.
This underlying objective of the NPSREG is supported by a range of policies that are relevant to
1
While the NPSREG is specific to ‘electricity’ generation, REG is used in this report to refer to both electricity
and more broadly to renewable ‘energy’ generation.
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
1
consideration of this chapter of the PDP and which are referred to in this report where
particularly pertinent. Chapter 16 of the CRPS is also specific to energy activities. These
documents, and the requirement for the Council to give effect to them, need to also be
considered alongside the other responsibilities of the Council, for example requirements
relating to ONLs and ONFs.
Planning Assessment
7.
The approach taken to assessing submissions on Chapter 7 is a topic-based approach focussing
on the key issues for resolution set out above. However, before assessing the key issues, I
consider it necessary to firstly consider the two objectives proposed in the Chapter 7, in order
to properly consider whether changes to the PDP in relation to these issues is more appropriate
to achieve the PDP’s objectives. Any submission points that do not fall into the key issues are
then assessed on a provision-by-provision basis.
Objectives
Provisions
8.
The proposed objectives are:
Objective 7.1
The development, operation, maintenance and upgrading of new and existing renewable energy
generation activities is provided for, while ensuring that conflicts between these activities and
sensitive environments are minimised.
Objective 7.2
Energy generation, supply and use from non-renewable energy resources are provided for, only
where the associated environmental effects are avoided, remedied or mitigated.
Submissions
9.
No submitters have opposed these objectives, with CDHB & HWP seeking their retention.
Rooney & MainPower also seek the retention of Objective 7.1.
10. The changes sought by submitters are:
-
-
Meridian seek that the word “minimised” in Objective 7.1 is replaced with “managed”.
DOC seek that “and the life-supporting capacity of resources that contain values that are
significant in accordance with Appendix 13.1 are avoided” is added to each objective on the
basis that energy activities can have adverse effects on natural resources.
Rooney and MainPower seek that Objective 7.2 be amended slightly and in particular to
refer to “adverse” environmental effects.
Meridian seek that reference is made in Objective 7.2 to offsetting and compensation, on
the basis that the NPSREG and CRPS recognise these as legitimate ways of addressing
adverse effects of REG activities.
Discussion
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
2
11. The change sought to Objective 7.1 by Meridian relates to a wider matter of how energy
activities in sensitive environments are managed, and I do not consider this change appropriate
for the reasons explained elsewhere in this report.
12. With regards to the additional wording sought by DOC, in my view this is already covered in the
objectives without the need for this explicit reference to these particular resources. Further, I
do not consider this to be appropriate as the resources referred to are a matter that is
addressed in Chapter 13 and implemented through the rules in that chapter, which apply to
energy activities in any case. This is consistent with the further submission of MainPower who
oppose the relief sought as they consider that specific reference to the criteria for determining
areas of significant biodiversity value is better placed in Chapter 13. In my view, the additional
wording would create unnecessary duplication and is not more appropriate to achieve the
RMA’s purpose.
13. In relation to the changes sought to Objective 7.2, I consider those sought by Rooney and
MainPower to be appropriate and to better align the objective with s5(2)(c) of the RMA. In
relation to extending the objective to refer to off-setting and compensation, my view is that
because the objective relates to non-renewable energy the NPSREG is not relevant to it and
reference to offsetting and compensation in the CRPS (Chapter 16) is more specific than the
wording sought by the submitter (i.e. it is to be considered in certain specified circumstances).
As such I don’t consider the additional wording to be appropriate.
Recommended Changes
14. Overall, I therefore recommend that Objective 7.1 is retained as currently worded and
Objective 7.2 amended as follows:
Objective 7.2
Energy generation, supply and use from non-renewable energy resources are provided for, only
where the any associated adverse environmental effects are avoided, remedied or mitigated.
Key Issues
Where the provisions for energy are located in the PDP
Provisions
15. As noted above, the rules relating to energy activities are not contained within Chapter 7 of the
PDP. A range of rules, contained within other chapters of the PDP, therefore apply to energy
activities. My understanding of the rules that apply to energy activities, and where these
currently ‘sit’ in the PDP is set out in the following table:
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
3
Table 1- Activity Status of Energy Activities
Rural
Settlements
General
Hurunui
Lakes
Hanmer
Basin
Managem
ent Area
Residential
Business
1
1A
1H
2
Industrial
Open Space
ONL/
ONF
Coastal
Environment
(Rural rule
applies)
Small Scale
PZ* (D)
D
PZ* (D)
P** (D)
PZ*
(D)
PZ*
(D)
PZ*
(D)
P**
(D)
PZ* (D)
D
Community
Scale
PZ* (D)
D
PZ* (D)
D
PZ*
(D)
PZ*
(D)
PZ*
(D)
D
PZ* (D)
D
(Rural
rule
applies)
RD
Commercial
Scale
PZ* (D)
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
D
NC
All Energy
Activities
Also subject to meeting various district-wide rules, for example those pertaining to indigenous vegetation removal, hazardous substances and
natural hazards.
RD (but NC if
also in
ONF/L)
NC
Key:
Abbreviation
PZ*
P**
(D)
NC
D
RD
Meaning
Permitted, subject to meeting the Zone-based permitted activity standards.
Listed as a permitted activity, but subject to meeting the permitted activity standards including those pertaining to energy activities.
Defaults to Discretionary where permitted activity standards are not met.
Non-complying
Discretionary (defaults to this as not listed as a permitted activity)
Restricted Discretionary
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
4
Submissions
16. Meridian, Rooney and MainPower seek that the Energy Chapter contain all provisions related to
energy. This would essentially involve moving the rules and related assessment matters for
energy activities into the same chapter that contains the objectives and policies.
17. As part of this, Meridian suggest a simplified rule package for energy activities that would mean
that the current zone-based standards would not apply to energy activities. MainPower, whilst
seeking that the rules pertaining to community and commercial scale energy activities be
included in Chapter 7, suggest retaining the rules applicable to small scale energy activities
within the current zone rules.
18. Fed Farmers oppose these changes in their further submission, stating that it is inappropriate to
elevate energy activities in the way proposed.
Discussion
19. As can be seen from the above table, the location of rules relating to energy activities are
spread throughout the PDP, and in many cases, the activity status is determined by compliance
with a range of standards applicable to the zone within which the activity is located. As such, a
straight ‘transfer’ of the complete rules package that currently applies to energy would in many
cases require replication of those zone-based standards. My view is that such replication, or
cross-referencing to all standards currently applicable to energy activities is not appropriate as
it would involve too much duplication and lacks efficiency.
20. However, as suggested by Meridian, this duplication could be overcome by the zone-based
standards effectively being removed, thus treating energy activities as ‘standalone’ activities
similar to the Utilities Chapter. In principle, I agree that this is a more efficient and effective way
to manage energy activities in the PDP. However, I note that while utilities are not subject to
the general zone-based standards, they are subject to various standards within Chapter 9, such
as height limits and setbacks. Therefore, my concern with the approach proposed by Meridian,
particularly in relation to permitted activities, is that the adverse effects of some energy
activities will not be adequately addressed.
21. MainPower’s suggested approach would mean that small scale energy activities would continue
to be subject to the applicable zone-based standards, with these ultimately determining
whether a small scale energy activity is permitted in a particular location or not. I think there is
some merit in this approach, in that the effects of small scale energy activities would be
managed under the same zone-based standards as other activities. However, on balance I
consider that it is clearer and more efficient to treat all energy activities consistently and
therefore include all energy activities within Chapter 7. In my view, combining the rules for
energy activities into Chapter 7 does not ‘elevate’ these activities in the way suggested by Fed
Farmers.
Recommendation
22. My recommendation is to include the rules relating to energy activities within the Energy
Chapter, whilst retaining some standards over permitted energy activities. This would include
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
5
the permitted standards currently applicable to energy activities, including noise, being moved
to the Energy Chapter. In my view, the height and setback limits for the zone within which the
energy activity is located should also still be applied, as this ensures that potential adverse
effects from these activities will be no greater than those that could result from other
activities/structures within the same zone.
23. My recommended changes largely follow the activity status set out in the table above, so for
example, in zones where small-scale energy activities are not currently permitted, the proposed
rules for Chapter 7 continue this. If there is sufficient scope in submissions, my view is that
some efficiencies could be gained and the objectives in the PDP more effectively achieved by:
-
-
providing a permitted status (subject to the standards) for any small-scale energy activity,
as I consider these, due to the limitations on scale, to be appropriate within the Open
Space and Hurunui Lakes area;
specifically listing commercial scale energy activities within the Open Space Zone as noncomplying as the current default discretionary status seems to be an anomaly within the
PDP;
24. As shown in the table above, whilst commercial scale energy activities are technically permitted
in the Rural Zone, they are unlikely to meet the range of applicable standards and would default
to a discretionary status. In recognition of this and due to the scope within submissions relating
to ‘new’ commercial scale energy activities, I recommend that these are specified as
discretionary activities.
25. As a consequence of including these rules within Chapter 7, I recommend deletion of the
following rules from their respective chapters:
-
3.4.7.7; 3.4.8.6; 4.5.8; 4.6.17; 4.9.5; 4.11.2(i); 4.12.14; 4.15.1(c); 4.15.2(e); 4.15.3(c);
4.17.11; 4.19.1(e)2; 4.24(xvi); 11.4.6.4; 11.4.7.4; 12.5.7; 12.6.8.
Related submissions
26. The following paragraphs address submissions that relate to or are affected by the above
recommendation.
27. Currently, because energy activities are subject to the standards for the zone within which they
are located, there are a range of rules that apply to these activities. Meridian, while seeking
ultimately that the rules pertaining to energy activities are contained within the Energy Chapter,
seek exemptions for energy activities from some of these standards, should their preferred
relief not be granted. For example, they seek that REG activities be exempted from Rule
3.4.3(17) which is a permitted activity rule that restricts buildings and structures on ridgelines
and Rule 3.4.3(10), which is a permitted activity rule requiring screening of non-residential
activities.
28. Because of my recommendation to include energy activities within Chapter 7, these rules will
no longer apply to energy activities and therefore further amendment to these rules is not
2
Note – This relates is the second (e) listed under this rule, which should have been numbered (h).
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
6
required in order to grant the relief sought by the submitter. However, specifically considering
whether these should be included as permitted activity standards for energy activities (and
therefore included in Chapter 7), it is my view that that these standards need not be applied to
permitted energy activities (i.e. small or community-scale activities). For larger energy activities
(i.e. those that will require consent) the types of effects that these rules aim to manage can still
be considered through the consenting process.
29. I also note that MainPower and Meridian support or seek other changes to various rules within
the Rural and Settlements chapters, in the event that their primary relief to shift the rules for
energy activities into Chapter 7 is not granted. Because of my recommendation to do so, these
submission points are not addressed in the s42A report for the Rural or Settlements Chapter.
30. HWP state that while REG activities are intended to be provided through the zone rules in the
PDP, there are no specific provisions within the Rural Zone rules for these activities, except for
assessment criteria. HWP therefore does not believe that the Chapter’s objectives and policies
are implemented through the Rural Zone rules. They seek that the development, operation,
maintenance and upgrade of REG activities are specifically provided for in the Rural Zone as a
restricted discretionary activity, with discretion limited to the matters set out in the proposed
assessment criteria. In my view, moving the rules and related assessment matters for REG
activities into Chapter 7 essentially addresses the concern raised by this submitter. In regards to
the specific activity status assigned to various energy activities in different locations, my view is
that restricted discretionary is not the most appropriate in all circumstances. In particular,
consideration of the activity status in sensitive areas is set out below.
REG activities in sensitive areas
Provisions
31. Policies 7.6 and 7.7, as set out below, seek to minimise the potential for adverse effects arising
from commercial and community scale REG activities by restricting its development in more
‘sensitive’ locations.
Policy 7.6
To minimise the potential for adverse effects arising from commercial scale renewable energy
activities, by restricting its development in the following locations:
1. Outstanding natural features and landscapes;
2. Areas with significant indigenous biodiversity;
3. Coastal environment and outstanding natural character areas;
4. Urban areas;
5. Hanmer Basin; and
6. Hurunui Lakes area.
Policy 7.7
To minimise the potential for adverse effects arising from community scale renewable energy
activities, by restricting its development in the following locations:
1. Outstanding natural features and landscapes;
2. Areas with significant indigenous biodiversity; and
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
7
3. Coastal environments and outstanding natural character areas.
32. These policies are implemented through a non-complying activity status for commercial scale
energy activities in the areas identified in Policy 7.6 and a restricted discretionary activity status
for community scale energy activities in the areas identified in Policy 7.7, under the following
rules:



Non-complying rules for commercial scale energy activities:
o Rule 3.4.7.7 - Hanmer Basin Management Area and Hurunui Lakes zone
o Rule 4.9.5 – Residential Zone
o Rule 4.15.1(c) - Business 1 Zone
o Rule 4.15.2(e) - Business 1A & 1H Zone
o Rule 4.15.3(c) - Business 2 Zone
o Rule 4.19.1(e) – Industrial Zone
o Rule 11.4.7.4 – ONFs or ONLs
o Rule 12.6.8 – Coastal Environment
Restricted discretionary rules for community scale energy activities:
o Rule 11.4.6.4 - ONFs or ONLs
o Rule 12.5.7 – Coastal Environment
In areas with significant indigenous biodiversity, restrictions are based on the rules in
Chapter 13 that relate to vegetation in these areas.
Submissions
33. Meridian seek that these policies are deleted and that these activities are provided for in these
environments as a discretionary activity. This is on the basis that the policies and non-complying
activity status do not recognise that many REG activities have been found to promote the
sustainable management of natural and physical resources within such areas. They state that
deleting the policies and amending the activity status does not provide for unfettered
development of REG activities within these areas, but instead provides a more appropriate
regulatory regime that gives effect to the NPSREG and CRPS. They also consider that the
provisions do not recognise, as provided in the NZCPS, that the coastal environment is an
important natural resource base for potential REG activities. The restrictions in the policies and
the rules are considered to be unnecessary, inefficient and ineffective.
34. MainPower and Rooney seek that Policy 7.6 (and similarly Policy 7.7) is amended as follows:
Manage the development of To minimise the potential for adverse effects arising from
community scale renewable energy activities to minimise adverse effects, by restricting its
development in the following locations:...”
35. This is on the basis that the term “restricting” is onerous and “manage” better reflects that way
the policy is implemented.
36. MainPower seek that changes to the activity status for commercial scale REG activities so that
new REG activities are discretionary, except within Residential zones. While they consider that
controlling commercial scale energy activities within the identified areas is appropriate, they
consider that the non-complying activity is onerous and signals that such an activity would
generally be inappropriate in those locations (excepting Residential zones). Their view is that a
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
8
discretionary status enables the Council full discretion while signalling that such activities may
be appropriate.
37. Rooney also seek that commercial scale energy activities within the Hanmer Basin Management
area, the Hurunui Lakes Zones and ONL/ONF areas are discretionary rather than non-complying.
As with MainPower, they consider the non-complying status activity is too onerous, does not
take into account the unique requirements of commercial scale energy activities and signals
that such an activity would generally be inappropriate in those locations. However, they
consider that commercial REG activities would not necessarily be inappropriate in these areas.
38. DOC seek that Policies 7.6 & 7.7 are amended, in particular to replace “minimise” with “avoid”
and “restricting” with “avoiding”. This is opposed in a further submission by Mainpower who
consider that “minimise” is more appropriate in this policy context, as given the operational,
functional and locational requirements of energy infrastructure, it is not always possible to
avoid adverse effects. DOC also seek that reference to “Areas with significant indigenous
biodiversity” is replaced with “Significant vegetation and habitats of significant fauna” and that
the “Hurunui Lakes Area” is added to Policy 7.7. They consider these amendments are
necessary to provide greater clarity for those matters where s6 of the RMA requires a high
degree of protection of values and consider the policies as worded as inconsistent with the
CRPS and NZCPS.
Discussion
39. I accept that a non-complying activity status generally signals that an activity is not likely to be
appropriate. While it does not mean that consent cannot be granted, under s104D the
thresholds for granting the consent are higher. As such, the question is whether these higher
thresholds are necessary to ensure that the various objectives of the PDP are achieved. This
means considering not just the objectives in Chapter 7, but also those in Chapter 3 (Rural),
Chapter 4 (Settlements), Chapter 11 (Landscape) and Chapter 12 (Coastal Environment).
40. In relation to urban areas, I note that the size of townships within the Hurunui District are
relatively small and that consequentially, Business and Industrial Zones are located in relatively
close proximity to residential areas. While MainPower state that all commercial scale energy
activities would not necessarily be inappropriate in the Business and Industrial zones, they have
not provided an example of a specific area where these larger-scale activities might be
appropriate. In my opinion, it is difficult to think of a commercial scale energy activity that
would (generally) ensure that the character and environmental quality of these areas would be
retained (Objective 4). My view is therefore that a non-complying status is the most
appropriate.
41. In relation to ONF/ONLs, Objective 11 aims for the protection of these areas and in relation to
the coastal environment, Objective 12 aims for the protection and maintenance of this
environment. In my view “protection” is a strong word and sends a clear signal about the
importance of these areas. I also accept that this needs to be balanced against Objective 7.1, in
terms of providing for the development and operation of REG activities. However this objective
also says “while ensuring that conflicts between these activities and sensitive environments are
minimised”. (For completeness I note that Meridian seek that the word “minimised” in
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
9
Objective 7.1 is replaced with “managed”.) I also note the similar direction in the NPSREG - the
Objective and Policy A - to recognise and provide for REG activities. However I do not believe
that this a blanket direction to allow for these activities in any area, without further
consideration of the appropriateness of locating that type of activity in a particular area.
42. In this instance, commercial scale energy activities are provided for as discretionary activities in
the general Rural Zone, but in identified areas of high value where the aim is ‘protection’ of
these areas, a non-complying status reflects the higher sensitivity of these environments. In my
opinion, this is an appropriate way to provide for REG activities while recognising that in some
areas, the values are such that protection from this type of activity is required. My view is that a
non-complying activity status still allows an application to be made and considered on a caseby-case basis including assessment against the objectives and policies of the PDP and ultimately
whether a proposal will promote the sustainable management of natural and physical
resources. I therefore do not agree with the submitters that a discretionary status is a more
appropriate regulatory regime, on the basis that the PDP must not only give effect to the
NPSREG and CRPS in relation to REG activities, but also achieve its objectives and give effect to
other provisions in the CRPS relating to landscapes and the coastal environment.
43. I have also considered the direction in Policy C1 of the NPSREG for decision makers to have
particular regard to the need to locate REG activities where the resource is available and the
logistical or technical practicalities associated with REG. I note that the submitters have not
provided evidence that these more sensitive areas are where the resources are predominantly
available and/or whether there are logistical or technical restraints against locating REG
activities in the general Rural Zone. My understanding is that there are two wind farms
currently consented within the District, one of which is located partly in an ONF and partly
within the Rural Zone, and the other is solely within the Rural Zone. In my opinion, if it was
shown that providing for REG activities in the Rural Zone as discretionary activities does not
actually provide for these activities in this district because the resource base is located solely or
at least predominantly within the sensitive areas (ONF/ONLs, Coastal Environment, Rural
Hurunui Lakes and/or Rural Hanmer Basin) then a non-complying status within these areas may
not be the most appropriate. The current consented wind farms do not suggest this is the case.
As it stands, my view is that the non-complying status sends a clear signal that REG activities are
likely to be more appropriate in Rural Zone, with a higher bar to their location within these
sensitive areas.
44. I have also considered whether the changes to the policies sought by DOC are more
appropriate. While I support the non-complying activity status, my view is that using the word
“avoid” in the policy as sought would convey an even stronger message about REG activities in
these locations, and in my experience, ‘avoidance’ is usually implemented through a prohibited
activity status. Given the direction in the NPSREG and CRPS in relation to REG activities, my view
is that such an approach would go too far and not give effect to these documents. I also note
that the submitter states that the policies are inconsistent with the CRPS and NZCPS but has not
identified how they are inconsistent. I note, for example, that replacing reference to “significant
indigenous biodiversity” to “significant vegetation and habitats of significant fauna” goes
beyond the matter of national importance in s6 of the RMA, which specifically refer to
“indigenous” vegetation and habitats. I also consider that adding the Hurunui Lakes to Policy
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
10
7.7, which relates to community scale energy activities, is not consistent with the rule
framework for these activities in this location and note that the submitter has not sought a
change to the rules to implement this policy change. Therefore I do not consider it is
appropriate.
Recommendation
45. I recommend that Policies 7.6 & 7.7 and related non-complying rules are retained, and that
Objective 7.1 is not amended in relation to this issue. As a result, I do not recommend
consequential changes to other policies or explanations that relate to this issue (for example,
changes sought to Policy 7.1(2) and 7.8 sought by Meridian).
Policies
Provisions
46. There are nine policies in total in the Energy Chapter. Other than those discussed above, the
other policies of relevance to submissions are Policies 7.1, 7.5 and 7.9, which are:
Policy 7.1
To recognise the national, regional and local significance of energy production from renewable
resources by:…
Policy 7.5
To acknowledge the practical constraints associated with the development, operation,
maintenance and upgrading of new and existing renewable energy generation activities.
Policy 7.9
To consider environmental compensation or offsetting measures, including measures or
compensation which benefits the local environment and community affected, where any
residual environmental effects of renewable energy generation activities cannot be avoided,
remedied or mitigated.
Submissions
47. Rooney and MainPower seek that Policy 7.1 is amended to refer to the significance “and
benefits” of energy production.
48. Rooney also seek that Policy 7.5 is amended to add “including the need to locate renewable
generation activities where the renewable energy resource is available.”
49. Related to this, MainPower and Meridian seek that an additional policy is added that specifically
recognises and provides for the development, operation, maintenance and upgrading of
electricity generation activities. Meridian also seek a related explanation to their proposed
policy. Meridian consider that the current policy approach is insufficient to give effect to the
NPSREG and CRPS, particularly in regards to a lack of policy recognition that REG activities can
have a functional, technical or operational requirement to be sited in a particular location. The
policy sought is set out below, with the wording of both parties italicised only, and wording
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
11
sought just by Meridian highlighted in grey and wording sought just by MainPower highlighted
in green:
Recognise and provide for the development, operation, maintenance, repowering and upgrading
of new and existing renewable electricity generation activities, in a manner that:
1. Recognises the need to locate renewable electricity generation activities where the renewable
electricity resources are available.
2. Recognises logistical and technical practicalities associated with developing, upgrading,
operating and maintaining renewable electricity generation activities.
3. Encourages, facilitates and provides for research and exploratory-scale investigations into
existing and emerging renewable electricity generation technologies and methods.
4. Recognises the complexity of developing renewable electricity generation activities.
50. DOC seek deletion of Policy 7.9 on the basis that it does not provide plan users or decision
makers with adequate guidance in relation to implementing biodiversity offsets. MainPower
oppose this, stating that Policy 7.9 gives effect to Policy C2 of the NPSREG and noting that it
relates to offsetting a variety of matters rather than being limited to biodiversity offsetting.
Discussion
51. In relation to adding “and benefits” to Policy 7.1, I note that Policy A of the NPSREG refers to
recognising and providing for “the national significance of renewable electricity generation
activities, including the national regional and local benefits”. I therefore consider that the
amendment sought is appropriate and more consistent with the NPSREG.
52. In relation to the new policy sought by Meridian and MainPower, I have considered the
proposed objectives and policies in Chapter 7 and have concerns that the proposed policy
includes matters that are already addressed in other provisions. For example, the start of the
policy largely duplicates proposed Objective 7.1 and Policy 7.5 already refers to the practical
constraints associated with REG activities and therefore clause (2) of the submitters’ policy is a
repetition of this. Similarly, the explanation proposed by Meridian is essentially covered in the
introduction to the Chapter.
53. Therefore my view is that a new policy is not appropriate and it introduces too much
unnecessary duplication. However, I consider that there are aspects of the policy proposed that
could be usefully incorporated into other policies, including as suggested by Rooney in relation
to Policy 7.5. For completeness, in my view Policy 7.5 as amended sufficiently covers the
‘complexity’ referred to in clause (4) of the submitters’ policy.
54. In relation to Policy 7.9, my view is that deleting the policy would provide even less guidance on
biodiversity offsets. I also note that Policy 7.9 is consistent with the direction in Policy C2 of the
NPSREG for decision-makers to have regard to offsetting measures or environmental
compensation and deleting it would not assist in giving effect to the NPSFM.
Recommendation
55. I recommend that Policy 7.9 is retained.
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
12
56. In relation to Policies 7.1 and 7.5, I recommend the amendments set out below:
Policy 7.1
To recognise the national, regional and local significance and benefits of energy production from
renewable resources by:
1. Enabling the investigation, identification and assessment of potential sites for renewable
energy generation and investigations into renewable energy generation technologies and
methods; and …
Policy 7.5
To acknowledge the practical and logistical constraints associated with the development,
operation, maintenance and upgrading of new and existing renewable energy generation
activities, including the need to locate these activities where the renewable energy resources are
available.
Additional permitted activities
Provisions
57. Currently, as shown in Table 1- Activity Status of Energy Activities, energy activities are
permitted in many zones, subject to meeting a range of standards that are zone-based. There
are no specific rules relating to the upkeep of existing energy activities (operation,
maintenance, repair etc). There are also no specific rules relating to the investigation and
assessment of REG activities, however, these types of activities are likely to be considered
under the utilities rules – for example, the erection of a monitoring mast.
Submissions
58. As noted earlier, Meridian, Rooney and MainPower have sought, to varying degrees, that the
rules relating to energy activities be included within the Energy Chapter. In addition, they seek
that additional permitted or restricted discretionary activity rules are introduced for particular
energy activities.
59. MainPower seek, in relation to community and commercial scale energy activities:
-
-
A permitted activity for Energy Prospecting relating to REG activities (outside identified
sensitive areas) or a discretionary activity within identified sensitive areas (Coastal
Environment, ONL/ONF, residential zones)
A permitted activity for the operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, refurbishment,
enhancement and upgrading of REG
A rule and assessment criteria framework be added for non-renewable electricity
generation activities (but do not specify the framework)
60. Meridian seek, in relation to any energy activities:
-
A permitted activity for the operation, maintenance, refurbishment, enhancement and
minor upgrading of any existing energy facility
A permitted activity for investigation and assessment works (outside ONF/ONL areas or
affecting scheduled heritage features) for electricity generation projects, including
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
13
-
identification and assessment of potential sites and energy sources for REG and researchscale investigation into existing and new technologies and methods.
A restricted discretionary activity for investigation and assessment works within ONF/ONL
areas, or outside these areas where they do not meet the permitted activity standards.
61. In relation to the upkeep of existing energy activities, Meridian state that when REG activities
are established, experience shows that minor changes are required over time, which are small
in scale and do not result in more than minor adverse effects. Their view is that providing for
the maintenance of these activities is important to give effect to the NPSREG requirement to
maintain the generation output of existing REG activities.
62. In relation to investigation and assessment works, Meridian’s view is that such works are
necessary to determine whether the natural resources are likely to be suitable for potential
development and that the investigation and monitoring works are temporary in nature. They
consider that any actual effects are able to be effectively managed through permitted activity
conditions that limit these works to a 5-year period and require removal of equipment and
rehabilitation of the site.
63. Te Rūnanga, in a further submission, oppose permitted activity status for energy prospecting,
stating that the uncertainty associated with the nature and scale of energy prospecting means
a permitted activity status is inappropriate.
Discussion
64. In my view, explicitly providing for the operation, maintenance, repair and replacement of any
existing energy facility as a permitted activity is appropriate, as the effects of the activity are
part of the existing environment, and minor changes that relate to these activities are unlikely
to noticeably increase any adverse effects. I do not consider this needs to be extended to
‘refurbishment’ as I consider this is adequately covered by reference to ‘maintenance, repair
and replacement’ and it is not clear to me exactly what refurbishment might entail beyond this.
65. In relation to ‘minor upgrading’, I note that Meridian have also proposed a definition for this, as
follows:
Minor Upgrading (in relation to existing energy facilities) – means modification of an energy
facility including structures and associated earthworks and site works where the effects of that
utility remain the same or similar in character, and scale. Minor upgrading includes the
replacement of a structure in the same location, and replacement of parts such structures.
66. In a general sense, I consider that it is appropriate to provide for some upgrade works as a
permitted activity, on the basis that the effects of the activity are already established and minor
upgrading is unlikely to result in a significant increase in effects. My concern with providing for
this as a permitted activity is that it may lack certainty as to what is the same or similar in
character and scale. That being said, I note that this kind of wording is used in the RMA in
relation to existing use rights under s10, whereby land use that may contravene a rule in a
district plan is able to continue where the effects are “the same or similar in character,
intensity, and scale”. Similarly, I note that there are other places in the PDP, for example Rule
9.4.3.1(d) which rely on references to “similar scale or character” to define a permitted activity.
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
14
On balance, I consider it is appropriate to include minor upgrading, but recommend the
definition is extended to also refer to intensity, consistent with s10(1)(a)(ii) of the RMA.
67. In terms of ‘enhancement’, ‘upgrading’ and ‘refurbishment’, I consider it unclear what these
may constitute, and therefore difficult to determine if this is appropriate. In particularly
‘upgrading’ without any limitation could allow for significant increase in effects. My preference
is therefore for the new permitted activity rule to apply to operation, maintenance, repair,
replacement and minor upgrading only.
68. In relation to energy prospecting/investigation and assessment works, my concern is that
providing for these as permitted activities, where they are no longer subject to zone-based
standards or to the wider utility rules, and with either limited or no permitted activity standards
does not sufficiently manage the potential adverse effects of these activities to ensure the
PDP’s objectives are met. In my view, allowing for any investigation and assessment works,
even within a limited timeframe, could have significant adverse effects. I consider that these
types of activities, where they fall within the proposed definitions for energy activities, should
be subject to the same activity status and standards as any other type of energy activity. Where
such investigation and assessment works do not fall within the proposed definitions for energy
activities, I consider that they are best considered under the PDP’s utility rules. A good example
of this is that under Meridian’s proposed relief, investigation and assessment works would
include the erection of meteorological masts up to 100m in height. Under the proposed Utility
rules, such masts are limited to 30m (Rule 9.4.3.2(b)(i)). In my view, there is insufficient
justification for this increase.
Recommendation
69. I recommend that the following is provided for as a permitted activity:
The operation, maintenance, repair, replacement and minor upgrading of any existing energy
activity.
Other provisions
70. The following considers submissions on provisions that are not otherwise covered above in
consideration of key issues.
Minor matters
71. A number of submission points seek minor changes to the proposed provisions to improve their
wording. I recommend that these be accepted (whilst in some cases recommending slightly
amended wording to that proposed by the submitter) as they provide clarity and will improve
workability. This includes the following (in summary):
-
Adding reference in the Introduction section to other forms of energy, such as bio-fuels (Oil
Companies)
Amending Policy 7.2 to refer to “adverse” environmental effects (Rooney and MainPower)
Amending the definitions of “Energy Prospecting” and “Renewable Electricity Generation
Activities” (MainPower)
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
15
-
Clarifying that the permitted activity standard pertaining to an area limit for free-standing
solar panels is not applicable to roof-mounted solar panels (MainPower)
72. Meridian also seek minor changes throughout the Chapter to refer to renewable “electricity”
generation rather than renewable “energy” generation so as to be consistent with the NPSREG.
I have not recommended that these amendments be made, as while I accept this would be
consistent with the NPSREG, both s7(j) of the RMA and Chapter 16 of the CRPS refer to
renewable energy and therefore I consider it more appropriate to retain this broader reference.
Rules
73. As part of a wider submission seeking the reform of Chapters 11 & 12 that is discussed in the
s42A reports for those chapters, Fed Farmers seek that Rule 11.4.6.4, which provides for
community scale energy activities as a restricted discretionary activity within ONL/F areas is
deleted. However it is not clear why this deletion is sought nor how this would implement the
policies in Chapter 7, so I do not consider its deletion (in entirety) to be appropriate. As noted
earlier, I have recommended that the rule is moved from Chapter 11 into Chapter 7.
Assessment criteria
74. Within the Rural Chapter, there are specific assessment criteria set out for energy activities
(3.4.8.6). Transpower seek that these assessment criteria are amended to apply also to “Energy
Infrastructure” and for an additional criterion to be added in relation to the National Grid. This
is on the basis that only energy activities are afforded enabling criteria. In my view this
amendment is not appropriate as the National Grid is dealt with in the Utilities Chapter
(Chapter 9). This includes specific rules and assessment matters that apply to the National Grid
and in my view this remains the more appropriate place in the PDP for provisions relating to the
Grid.
Definitions
75. Energy activities are, by definition, categorised according to their scale - small scale, community
and commercial. Small scale is defined as:
Small scale energy activity means an energy activity that is located within the same site where
the energy is intended to be used and for use by a single household unit or an accessory building,
business, including farming operations, as well as multiple dwelling units within the same
building or within the same computer freehold register (certificate of title). The activity’s energy
instantaneous output must not exceed 5kW. The capacity (energy output) of equipment shall be
intended to meet the needs of the site, while allowing the export of energy to public networks in
times of limited on-site demand.
76. MainPower seek that reference to the 5kW energy output is removed, on the basis that it is not
sufficient to provide for an average home’s electricity demand, noting that removal of the
reference would not compromise the intent of the definition. I agree that removal of the
reference would not undermine the intent of the definition, and agree it should be removed
from the definition if the limit is insufficient to provide for the electricity demand of an average
home.
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
16
77. MainPower support the definitions for ‘Commercial Scale Energy Activity’ and ‘Community Scale
Energy Activity’, but seek that the distinction between the two is clarified, stating that there is
crossover between the definitions and that some activities could be considered to fall within
both definitions. However, as MainPower has not suggested how this could be clarified, I am
not able to make any recommendation.
Chapter 7: s42A report – Liz White
17